In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
xfs: fail recovery on a committed log item with no regions
If the first op of a transaction is a bare transaction header
(len == sizeof(struct xfs_trans_header)), xlog_recover_add_to_trans()
adds an item but no region, leaving it on r_itemq with ri_cnt == 0 and
ri_buf == NULL.
The header can be split across op records, so later ops may still add
regions; the item is only invalid if the transaction commits with none.
The runtime commit path never emits such a transaction, so this only
happens on a crafted log. It came from an AI-assisted code audit of the
recovery parser.
xlog_recover_reorder_trans() calls ITEM_TYPE() on the item, which reads
*(unsigned short *)item->ri_buf[0].iov_base and faults on the NULL
ri_buf. Reject it there, before the commit handlers that also read
ri_buf[0].
KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000000-0x0000000000000007]
RIP: 0010:xlog_recover_reorder_trans (fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c:1836)
xlog_recover_commit_trans (fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c:2043)
xlog_recover_process_data (fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c:2501)
xlog_do_recovery_pass (fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c:3244)
xlog_recover (fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c:3493)
xfs_log_mount (fs/xfs/xfs_log.c:618)
xfs_mountfs (fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c:1034)
xfs_fs_fill_super (fs/xfs/xfs_super.c:1938)
vfs_get_tree (fs/super.c:1695)
path_mount (fs/namespace.c:4161)
__x64_sys_mount (fs/namespace.c:4367)
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-06). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it